Editorial - D.C. Should Revisit Its Extension of Bar Hours for the Inauguration

CHALK IT UP to sheer exuberance. Instead of carefully evaluating the pros and cons of letting establishments that serve liquor keep round-the-clock hours during next month's inaugural events, the D.C. Council rushed through emergency legislation that even some supporters are now questioning. There's still time for council members to take a second -- more thoughtful -- look.

The council's decision to loosen restrictions on when restaurants, bars and nightclubs can serve alcohol in the days leading up to and after President-elect Barack Obama's inauguration has touched off a storm of criticism. The measure, pushed by the Restaurant Association of Metropolitan Washington, caught many by surprise; there was no advance notice or public input. Some fears are overblown, such as the image being conjured of drunken hordes rioting in the streets after the 5 a.m. last call for alcohol. Then, too, it's maddening when outlanders such as Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California and Robert F. Bennett of Utah get on their high horses and try to lecture local leaders about what is best. If there is such concern on Capitol Hill about the city's ability to deal with the large crowds and issues posed by the inauguration, why isn't Congress giving the city more money to underwrite the event's costs?

Still, it would be irresponsible for council members not to revisit this issue just because they don't want to appear to be caving in to political pressure. Council member Tommy Wells has the right idea in moving to revise the plan. Because there was no public hearing, it is hard to judge whether the benefits -- a boost to local businesses, additional services for visitors -- outweigh any disadvantages or whether there are consequences that haven't been envisioned. In particular, it is important to hear the unvarnished opinions of law enforcement officials. Whatever the final outcome, everyone will be better served when all the arguments have been aired.